Agenda and minutes

Apologies received from Alison Bradley, Beverley Coltman, Jo Beaumont, Felicity Clark, and Carolyn Shoyer. Dr Jude Mellor and Samantha Cooke also sent their apologies; they were substituted by Jon Mellor and David Warwick respectively.

Mark Mitchley, Simon Grindrod, Rebecca Jones, Robert Martin, Jason Brooks, and Lisa Craddock did not attend.

Martin Towers discussed the minutes of the last Leicestershire Schools’ Forum with forum members, presenting the opportunity to raise any issues or request amendments to the record. There were no amendments to previous minutes.

Jenny Lawrence reviewed the actions of the previous forum:

1.    There have been no further headteacher meetings to consider the establishment of a SEN Investment Fund. Jenny Lawrence has confirmed that Peter Leatherland and Rosalind Hopkins were invited to the initial meeting with Headteachers on 1 July 2024.

2.    Jenny Lawrence confirmed that the LA’s administrative costs are met within the 30% retained early years funding.

3.    Jenny Lawrence shared a link in September’s minutes to bring to the attention of Forum to how the Department for Education (DfE) publishes financial data for individual schools.

4.    The ISOS Publication report was included in September’s minutes.

5.    Martin Towers gathered input from Schools’ Forum members and provided a response to the Local Authority (LA) on the Schools Block Transfer consultation (see Appendix A).

Peter Leatherland raised that forum had requested data on Special Provision capacity Leicestershire, detailing whether all units were full. This data has not been provided to the forum. Jane Moore agreed to provide an overview of Special Provision capacity, although noted that filling special provisions to capacity will not alleviate the financial difficulties experienced by the LA and schools. Jane assured the forum that all information relevant to the 0.5% transfer proposal has been provided to the forum for review.

The Resetting the SEN Finance System paper reports on the outcome of the school consultation on the establishment of a SEND Investment Fund and a transfer of 0.5% from the Schools Block to the High Needs Block. The LA received 70 responses, although 6 were duplicates, which represented 23.3% of Leicestershire maintained and academy schools. In addition, the LA also received several direct emails which were also reviewed. Concerns were raised regarding the duplicate responses being removed from the consultation, Jane Moore confirmed that, although the report acknowledged the duplications, reported percentages are representative of all responses received for the consultation.

The report detailed that 83% of responses strongly disagreed with the LA proposal to create a SEND investment fund; only 15% either agreed or strongly agreed with the proposal. The key points from the consultation were the LA’s ability to administer a SEND Investment Fund effectively, 63% of responses strongly disagree with the proposal that Social, Emotional and Mental Health (SEMH) should be the initial focus of a SEND investment fund, with only 21% either strongly agreeing or agreeing with the proposal; the primary reason for disagreement with the establishment of the SEND Investment Fund was disagreement with the proposed funding transfer but a number of responses acknowledged that SEMH was a pressing need. 86% of responses strongly disagreed with the proposal for an annual funding transfer of 0.5%, with only 9% strongly agreeing or agreeing. Comments referred to the uneven impact on schools with a view that schools with higher SEN needs contributing more to the transfer.

The report analyses key themes identified within the consultation responses and provides the LA’s response. To address themes of school underfunding, the report reiterates that the purpose of the SEND Investment Fund would be to give funding back to the schools, rather than directing funding to the LA. The formula for the High Needs block does not consider the number of EHCPs; funding is determined by various demographic factors, general population, and levels of need and low deprivation. Several LA responses address a perception of the LA’s mismanagement of the High Needs block and a lack of faith in the LA to deliver support for children and young people with SEND. The LA has limited control on how the High Needs block is spent, £120m is spent on placements, High Needs DSG is £109m. The report sets out a reset of the SEND Finance System in line with that delivered by TSIL and a joint responsibility for supporting children and young people with SEN between LAs and schools.

The report addressed concerns of political bias within the LA’s proposal. The funding framework is set nationally by the DfE, including funding protections for schools, and it is the DfE that makes decisions on the factors within the National Funding Formula including the targeting of additional school funding. The LA has exceptionally limited ability to make changes to the nationally set funding frameworks for both Schools and High Needs. To address concerns that TSIL has not delivered improvement to the SEND system, the report noted that TSIL delivered more robust and consistent decision making through the introduction of more robust triage and decision-making processes. The proportion of EHCNAs with Decisions to Assess and Decisions to Issue has reduced over time and is now in line with operational targets. There is a significant year on year reduction in tribunal requests overall (as of 7th October, requests were down 14% year on year), and specifically on tribunals around refusal to assess or refusal to issue.

The consultation responses cited many concerns regarding school funding cuts,  ...  view the full minutes text for item 3.

For 2024-25 school budgets the Department for Education asked for the first time for Schools Forum support to continue with two aspects of school funding, which were approved and incorporated into 2024-25 budgets. The DfE are again asking for approval to continue these to 2025-26 budgets.

Without support for these adjustments, they cannot remain in place with the following implications for schools with exceptional premises funding. This funding will be removed and, whilst immaterial to total school funding, is material to the schools receiving it. The remaining schools with a pupil and MFG adjustment because of age range changes will not have the adjustments previously agreed by the County Council’s Cabinet and the DfE applied which would be inequitable with those schools fully through the age range change process.

Jenny Lawrence will recirculate the 2024-25 Disapplication report to members to review, as shared in the Schools’ Forum, November 2023. Martin Towers will obtain the views of school members and feedback to the LA before 18^th November (see Appendix B).

The date for the next Leicestershire Schools’ Forum is Wednesday 12^th February 2025 from 2pm – 4pm.

1.    Jane Moore will provide Schools’ Forum with an overview of capacity within Leicestershire special provisions.

2.    Jane Moore will review the language used in the Resetting the SEN Finance System report to ensure clarity before submitting to the Leicestershire County Cabinet.

3.    Jenny Lawrence will recirculate the 2024-25 Disapplication report to school members to review. Martin Towers will obtain the views of school members and feedback to the LA before 18^th November.